3 research outputs found
Dendritic cell vaccination and CD40-agonist combination therapy licenses T cell-dependent antitumor immunity in a pancreatic carcinoma murine model
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is notoriously resistant to treatment including checkpoint-blockade immunotherapy. We hypothesized that a bimodal treatment approach consisting of dendritic cell (DC) vaccination to prime tumor-specific T cells, and a strategy to reprogram the desmoplastic tumor microenvironment (TME) would be needed to break tolerance to these pancreatic cancers. As a proof-of-concept, we investigated the efficacy of combined DC vaccination with CD40-agonistic antibodies in a poorly immunogenic murine model of PDAC. Based on the rationale that mesothelioma and pancreatic cancer share a number of tumor associated antigens, the DCs were loaded with either pancreatic or mesothelioma tumor lysates. METHODS: Immune-competent mice with subcutaneously or orthotopically growing KrasG12D/+;Trp53R172H/+;Pdx-1-Cre (KPC) PDAC tumors were vaccinated with syngeneic bone marrow-derived DCs loaded with either pancreatic cancer (KPC) or mesothelioma (AE17) lysate and consequently treated with FGK45 (CD40 agonist). Tumor progression was monitored and immune responses in TME and lymphoid organs were analyzed using multicolor flow cytometry and NanoString analyzes. RESULTS: Mesothelioma-lysate loaded DCs generated cross-reactive tumor-antigen-specific T-cell responses to pancreatic cancer and induced delayed tumor outgrowth when provided as prophylactic vaccine. In established disease, combination with stimulating CD40 antibody was necessary to improve survival, while anti-CD40 alone was ineffective. Extensive analysis of the TME showed that anti-CD40 monotherapy did improve CD8 +T cell infiltration, but these essential effector cells displayed hallmarks of exhaustion, including PD-1, TIM-3 and NKG2A. Combination therapy induced a strong change in tumor transcriptome and mitigated the expression of inhibitory markers on CD8 +T cells. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the potency of DC therapy in combination with CD40-stimulation for the treatment of pancreatic cancer and provide directions for near future clinical trials
Defining the Critical Hurdles in Cancer Immunotherapy
ABSTRACT: Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators, others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet be overcome to improve outcomes of patients with cancer
Classification of current anticancer immunotherapies
During the past decades, anticancer immunotherapy has evolved from a promising
therapeutic option to a robust clinical reality. Many immunotherapeutic regimens are
now approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines
Agency for use in cancer patients, and many others are being investigated as standalone
therapeutic interventions or combined with conventional treatments in clinical
studies. Immunotherapies may be subdivided into “passive” and “active” based on
their ability to engage the host immune system against cancer. Since the anticancer
activity of most passive immunotherapeutics (including tumor-targeting monoclonal
antibodies) also relies on the host immune system, this classification does not properly
reflect the complexity of the drug-host-tumor interaction. Alternatively, anticancer
immunotherapeutics can be classified according to their antigen specificity. While some
immunotherapies specifically target one (or a few) defined tumor-associated antigen(s),
others operate in a relatively non-specific manner and boost natural or therapy-elicited
anticancer immune responses of unknown and often broad specificity. Here, we propose
a critical, integrated classification of anticancer immunotherapies and discuss the clinical
relevance of these approaches